Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!ginosko!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!ucla-cs!Jack.Bowman@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org
From: Jack.Bowman@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org (Jack Bowman)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Re: 60 Mins seg. (Dr. Day..)
Message-ID: <27825@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 6 Oct 89 14:51:00 GMT
Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU
Organization: FidoNet node 1:135/38 - C-Board, Miami FL
Lines: 29
Approved: aids@cs.ucla.edu
Archive-number: 1324

I saw and listened very carefully to that 60 minutes broadcast. When you set  
aside all of the sensationalism you are left with the following points:

1> Doctors in private practice are not in any way forced to deal with known  
HIV+ patients.

2> San Francisco General (where Dr. Day was practicing) is a PUBLIC hospital  
supported by tax dollars. They have a public policy which requires that they  
treat ALL who are admitted. Most large cities have at least one Public  
hospital.

3> Dr. Day is not and has never been forced to practice at that hospital. She  
can leave that public hospital and practice in a private institution. She does  
not have to leave the profession to avoid contact with HIV+ patients.

4> She appears to have a very valid concern (especially the atomized blood  
problem caused by drilling) that the Federal government could and should  
develop better protective devices rather than downplay the risk which is  
partially unknown at this time.

The Federal Government is famous for downplaying risks to health. Just look at  
all the nuclear and chemical risks that were downplayed in the past.

That segment could have been a sixty second blast if all the hoopla was  
dispensed with but then 60 minutes _is_ an entertainment program.

--  
Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!135!38!Jack.Bowman
Internet: Jack.Bowman@f38.n135.z1.fidonet.org